Exploring the Word of God Acts of the Apostles Volume 7: Chapters 24–28

By Paul Kroll

Paul Kroll completes his commentary on the book of Acts with an examination of the final chapters: from Paul's trial before Felix, to his arrival in Rome.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Grace Communion International
• Release date: Sep 1, 2012
• ISBN: 9781476038100

Book preview

Exploring the Word of God

Acts of the Apostles

Volume 7: Chapters 24–28

By Paul Kroll

Copyright 2012 Grace Communion International

Published by Grace Communion International

All scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.zondervan.com

The NIV and New International Version are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc.™

Cover artwork by Ken Tunell. Copyright Grace Communion International.

Table of Contents

Paul the Prisoner of Rome, continued: Acts 24

Acts 25

Acts 26

Paul Sails for Rome (Acts 27:1-28:15)

Acts 28

Paul at Rome (Acts 28:16-30)

About the author

About the publisher

Grace Communion Seminary

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Paul the Prisoner of Rome,

continued

Jews bring charges (Acts 24:1-4)

Five days after Paul arrived in Caesarea, the Jewish prosecuting team arrived to state their charges against him (24:1). It was composed of the high priest Ananias, some of the Jewish elders, and a special legal counselor named Tertullus. Tertullus was a common Greek name, and he was probably a Hellenistic Jew chosen because of his expertise in Roman law and his skill in public speaking. The Sanhedrin was taking no chances on letting Paul slip through its grasp. It had hired Tertullus to act as its lawyer.

When Felix asked Tertullus to present his case, he began with the usual flattery. Luke illustrated Tertullus’ approach with these words as the introduction of his speech: We have enjoyed a long period of peace under you, and your foresight has brought about reforms in this nation. Everywhere and in every way, most excellent Felix, we acknowledge this with profound gratitude (24:2-3).

Tertullus’ introduction was spoken in the style of orators when they spoke before dignitaries. The technique even had a name in Latin, the captatio benevolentiae. Luke gave us a summary of what Tertullus said. He probably described in some detail what he thought had brought peace and reform in Judea. However, Felix’s administration was characterized by insurrections and unrest, so Tertullus may have found it difficult to find many pleasant things to say.

Of course, Tertullus was not particularly interested in whether his compliments reflected reality. He wanted to sway Felix to the Sanhedrin’s position. Offering a twisted version of real events was simply part of business as usual. At some point, Tertullus must have realized he was belaboring the flattery and said, In order not to weary you further, I would request that you be kind enough to hear us briefly (24:4). Legal presentations were sometimes timed by the use of a water clock, something that kept long-winded counselors from speaking too long.

The case against Paul (Acts 24:5)

Tertullus next launched into a menacing accusation of Paul. We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world, he said to Felix. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect… (24:5). Troublemaker—creator of riots—ringleader of the Nazarene sect—these accusations were meant to paint Paul as an insurrectionist who was threatening the Pax Romana. Tertullus framed his accusations in terms of political subversion rather than religious opinions. By accusing Paul of treason, Tertullus was hoping to involve a political ruler in what was really a factional religious dispute.

The Jews were trying to induce the governor to construe the preaching of Paul as tantamount to causing civil disturbances throughout the Jewish population of the Empire. They knew that the governors were unwilling to convict on purely religious charges and therefore tried to give a political twist to the religious charge. (A.N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, page 50).

Thus, it was claimed that Paul (and the Christians) were a threat to local order and to the security of the Empire in general. Paul, it seemed, was being charged with singlehandedly creating disturbances across the Roman Empire!

The charge is framed in such a way as to suggest that this is no mere religious dispute, but a threat to the stability of Roman government. Paul is accused of being generally a trouble-maker throughout the Empire, a promoter of a particular messianic movement (which would suggest political agitation to the procurator), and a violator of the Sadducean regulations for the sanctity of the Temple, which were guaranteed by the Romans. (William Neil, The Acts of the Apostles, The New Century Bible Commentary, page 233)

Tertullus was trying to put Paul among the group of Jewish revolutionaries who were creating trouble for Felix. It’s true that Paul’s presence in a city did lead to riots among the Jews. But it was the Jews who created the disturbances, not Paul. Tertullus not only tried to put Paul, but the whole Christian movement on trial, by calling it a party or sect (Greek, hairesis)—the Nazarenes. This is the only time the New Testament uses the plural Nazarenes, and it is hung on Christians as a distasteful label. The Greek word hairesis meant a party such as the Sadducees (5:17) or the Pharisees (15:5). The Nazarenes could be seen as simply another sect of Judaism, one that happened to believe in Christ as Messiah. But that is not how the Jewish religious leaders looked upon the Christians. When Tertullus called the followers of Paul Nazarenes, he meant it as an expression of contempt (24:14).

The Jews’ case as described by Tertullus was based on false evidence. The Sanhedrin had used similar tactics before, in the trial of Jesus. Then, council members were looking for false evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death (Matthew 26:59). The same was true in Paul’s trial.

Desecrated the temple (Acts 24:6)

Tertullus then moved to the theological aspect of his accusation. He said of Paul that he even tried to desecrate the temple and that to prevent him from doing so, we seized him… (24:6). The original accusation had been softened. Now the Sanhedrin was no longer claiming that Paul violated the temple, but that he tried to do so. Also, the earlier reference to the Gentiles being in a forbidden part of the temple had disappeared.

Here, Tertullus probably wanted to argue that Paul’s case should properly be heard by the Sanhedrin. No doubt he would have liked to press the issue that the Jews should be given the right to impose the death penalty on Paul. Tertullus had to get around the fact that it couldn’t be proved that Paul had profaned the temple. He cleverly claimed the temple police had grabbed Paul before he could carry out his plan. Thus, if challenged on the fact that there were no witnesses to the supposed profanation, he could say that was because it never took place.

We the readers know the facts, and that Tertullus was putting his own spin on the situation. Paul had not attempted to profane the temple, nor had he done so accidentally. Neither was there an orderly arrest of Paul by temple police, as Tertullus tried to imply. A frantic mob had grabbed Paul and was trying to kill him, all on the basis of an unsubstantiated rumor (21:27-31).

What became of verse 7? (Acts 24:7-9)

Some ancient manuscripts (the Western text) add the following words to the end of verse 6: "…and we would